- User Since
- Dec 5 2012, 4:53 PM (314 w, 3 h)
LGTM with another minor round of test reduction
LGTM. I think this is OK, but I think there still might be a more proper way to use the live intervals
Can you try implementing the other approach first, and then applying this on top of it to show the difference more clearly?
Mon, Dec 10
Why aren't these matched in the first place? These shouldn't have gotten this far
LGTM with the long line fixed
Sun, Dec 9
The $ is supposed to be for check variables that are used globally and not cleared on a -LABEL
Sat, Dec 8
Fri, Dec 7
No, it's not committed. Variable + constant is a common case in general.
Thu, Dec 6
Move AtomicExpand change, make targets default to cmpxchg
I don't really see the point of this and think it will just be an inconvenience to llvm developers.
Add requested comment
I thought mesa was moving to stop using the relocations at all for this?
Wed, Dec 5
Added more tests in r348456, use match
I think if we can just declare something simple to follow that doesn't depend on the IR type alignment, we could pack any basic type and align any aggregates to 4
LGTM. Probably should remove the flag from the dpp_combine test
Tue, Dec 4
Attach correct patch
Rearrange code, apply on top of existing tests